Why ‘Under the Dome’ Didn't Convince Me (Opinion Piece)

Why ‘Under the Dome’ Didn't Convince Me (Opinion Piece)

Translated an opinion piece (note that Willfanyi does not support the opinion of the article and does not comment publicly about the documentary)

为什么《穹顶之下》没有说服我?Why ‘Under the Dome’ Didn't Convince Me

首 先要声明,这篇文章并不是来批判《穹顶之下》的。相反,柴静的这部作品,无论从包装的精美,文案叙事的设计,采访对象的深入,还是数据的翔实程度来看,都 非常值得喝彩,甚至有可能成为整个中国科学传播史上的经典之作。但是,跳出那些感情叙事的框架之后,我只能说,《穹顶之下》虽然感动了我,却没有说服我。 从更理性的角度出发,如果不把雾霾当做“私人恩怨”,而作为一项公共政策来谈论的话,似乎有更多的问题需要进一步深入探讨。

First of all I’d like to say that I’m not here to heap criticism on ‘Under the Dome’. Actually, I think that Chai Jing did a great job. She covered everything very well and structured her narrative in a clear and engaging way. Organising the data and interviews in such a way as to clearly communicate a message to the viewers must have been extremely difficult, and if there was a hall of fame for Chinese documentaries, this should be in it. But when I step back and look at the documentary, which by the way I found it very challenging and/or heart-rending to watch, I wouldn’t say I was necessarily persuaded. For when you look at the issue in a rational, economic way, i.e. not like Chai Jing whose dislike of smog is on the level of a personal vendetta, there are reasons to question some of the documentary's conclusions.